Please let me know which driver you have used and your opinion of how it is working in your speaker. I'm asking a very open ended question on purpose because I am new DIY building and don't have anything to reference to. I'm looking to develop a subjective sense of the two brands in that size. Metaphorically speaking, are we comparing a Corvette to a Camaro?.. or a Ferrari to a Corvette?.. or... Thanks!
at the end of the day is a matter of preferences.
BUT.. for first time DIYer, SEAS magnesium cone is more difficult to work with, their SEAS Prestige line is more "user friendly" though
Your thread is very "open". Seas are very good drivers overall, but the Magnesium-ones have a breakup that is pretty difficult to tame. Many like the the newer ones.
E.g. http://www.dynabel.no/Resource/File/1688/SE 4800 - U18RNX - H1571.PDF
E.g. http://www.dynabel.no/Resource/File/1688/SE 4800 - U18RNX - H1571.PDF
So far it seems the 7" Seas drivers are good stuff, but as a beginner I should be mindful of the magnesium units having greater cone break up that will need to be dealt with. I have read/ studied the graphs and designs on Zaph's, MarkK's, Troels Gravesen's, Paul Carmody's, Curt Campbell's, and the manufacturer's information. With these, I feel like I've got lots of objective information to work with.
The U18RNX/P was one of the first Seas drivers i thought would be a good choice for me to design on my own. The ER18 has been used in several design that look real good.
The RS180 metal cone is used in several designs that look real good too. I imagine the cone break-up is similar to deal with like the magnesium units.
One could almost buy 2 RS180's for the price of 1 U18RNX/P. Subjectively, is it worth it?
I have already purchased Dayton RS180 paper cone woofers and (accidentally: I meant to order the RS28F) DC28F tweeters. Subjectively, the woofer is good enough to start with. Sounds as good or better than the commercially speakers I've had for years. The tweeter is disappointing, crash cymbals sound more like jingle bells! Maybe it's the way I have the crossover set-up. I'm going to keep playing with them before I change them out for the RS28F, 27TDFC, 27TBFC/G or who knows.
More thoughts guys!! It may seem crazy to ask for opinions but it is what I'm looking for. Thanks again…
Keith
The U18RNX/P was one of the first Seas drivers i thought would be a good choice for me to design on my own. The ER18 has been used in several design that look real good.
The RS180 metal cone is used in several designs that look real good too. I imagine the cone break-up is similar to deal with like the magnesium units.
One could almost buy 2 RS180's for the price of 1 U18RNX/P. Subjectively, is it worth it?
I have already purchased Dayton RS180 paper cone woofers and (accidentally: I meant to order the RS28F) DC28F tweeters. Subjectively, the woofer is good enough to start with. Sounds as good or better than the commercially speakers I've had for years. The tweeter is disappointing, crash cymbals sound more like jingle bells! Maybe it's the way I have the crossover set-up. I'm going to keep playing with them before I change them out for the RS28F, 27TDFC, 27TBFC/G or who knows.
More thoughts guys!! It may seem crazy to ask for opinions but it is what I'm looking for. Thanks again…
Keith
Agreed.
The RS line from Dayton are awesome pound per sound drivers and even then are hard to beat without spending significant money.
The RS180 is notoriously difficult to work with however, requiring very low crossover points to address it's issues ( 1.5 kHz etc). The paper versions are much less of a concern in this regard.
A lot of SEAS prestige drivers lack any kind of shorting rings, but do come with excellent build quality and venting. The drivers probably have better long term power handling than the RS line, but that's about it.
The newer 7" prestige drivers do have shorting rings though, the ER18 and U18 are two examples and are a definite step above most of SEAS other prestige offerings.
So far this probably seems like it hasn't been much help, but that's because it really isn't. You cannot just lump all the drivers from one manufacturer together. Some are excellent, some are not quite so and some I'd avoid when compared to the competition. Some are stand out products when asked to perform a specific task, but are not a good idea when asked to do something else. You really do need to pick the driver for the application (regardless of manufacturer) if you want to get the most out of your design.
Zaph's tests are hardly objective, in part because his testing method is flawed. His tests are not anechoic, and he's had a number of issues with the measurement hardware and space. These have influences on the results, as can be seen in many of his tests. A test is only objective if it follows scientific methods of controlled data collection, and that isn't something we see here. As for Troels Gravesen, he is also biased because he has a vested interest in SEAS and several brands. He owns the brands he uses. He had the wool over many people's eyes for years, but we are wiser now. His measurements are also flawed. Buying speaker drivers based on a couple oversimplified measurements taken in a livingroom or basement is the completely wrong way to compare performance attributes, because the results are only applicable in that room and spot, and cannot be referenced against or repeated by others.
The original poster of this discussion has one real choice for finding his answer- he has to buy and try different drivers, and compare then in his own design. No amount of " this driver trumps this other brand because GuruX said so on his blog" will give the OP what he really needs. Each driver will sound vastly different with a wide range of factors, not limited to different loadings, with different crossovers, and in different rooms. What driver sounds real to one person, sounds like a speaker to someone else. Johnny's warm speaker is Jack's muddy box.
Last edited:
. You do not need an anechoic chamber to make reliable, accurate and meaningful measurements. All one has to do is properly gate those measurements to ensure that any room reflections are removed from the equation. Sure, this limits low frequency resolution, but that's absolutely fine in a world where the lower end of almost all drivers you will ever use, are operating purely within their pistonic range. Frequency response wise all the interesting stuff happens at roughly 300Hz and up, which one can easily measure to in the home environment. Everything below that, from a raw driver point of view, can be gained by either taking NF measurements, or simulation with accurate T/S parameters.Zaph has gone to great lengths to ensure that his testing is carried out with the same conditions for each and every driver that he measures. Or if the conditions are different, or if a room artefact is present, he states what these are.
I would be interested though in hearing what you think the flaws are with his measurements because to me it sounds like your wanting to throw the baby out with the bath water. Even if his measurements aren't 100% perfect, (then again whose are?) there is still a heck of a lot right with them that makes them extremely useful to the average DIYer.
I don't think it's hard to figure out that he has something to gain if you shop at Jantzen Audio since he has a link to them on every design page. Still he uses a lot of drivers that Jantzen doesn't carry and he praises many of them. He also can still offer valuable advise as to which Seas drivers appeal to him and work well in his designs. Even though he apparently has some sort of ties with Jantzen, he still gives away the crossover design on nearly all of his builds so that you are free to shop anywhere you like... What more could you ask of him?
I would think he has a vested interest in making designs that people will enjoy. Perhaps more importantly, he surely seems to enjoy his own designs, so you know he is putting his years of practice and experience into them.
He has probably the largest selection of comprehensive designs for DIYers out there. I have no problem with him making a few dollars in the process if I wind up with a good design.
I had similar problems with kouiky's post #11.. or at least the first paragraph - a fair bit of it is at best misleading (..and at worst out-right wrong ..kouiky: it's time to look up the common meaning of objective vs. subjective).
On the other hand, I do agree with the sentiment on of his second/last paragraph of post #11.
It really depends on the design and implementation of the loudspeaker.
The original poster hasn't provided enough detail on intended use and design restrictions to provide a well-informed response.
I think the best advice I could give based on the info. provided is that (..IF having suitable amplification):
-use what you've got (Dayton paper driver and silk dome), but add to it in a meaningful way. More specifically: use a well-chosen midrange to complement the two drivers you already have (..in a box/baffle design that will work). This could be either a 2.5 or full 3-way design, and it should be a less expensive result (assuming a "passive" crossover) if done correctly.
IF that's to difficult, then look to a proven design that's available.
On the other hand, I do agree with the sentiment on of his second/last paragraph of post #11.
It really depends on the design and implementation of the loudspeaker.
The original poster hasn't provided enough detail on intended use and design restrictions to provide a well-informed response.
I think the best advice I could give based on the info. provided is that (..IF having suitable amplification):
-use what you've got (Dayton paper driver and silk dome), but add to it in a meaningful way. More specifically: use a well-chosen midrange to complement the two drivers you already have (..in a box/baffle design that will work). This could be either a 2.5 or full 3-way design, and it should be a less expensive result (assuming a "passive" crossover) if done correctly.
IF that's to difficult, then look to a proven design that's available.
Last edited:
Maybe off topic ... sorry ... but I would really consider SB Acoustics. As far as I know the guys have been working for SS before starting SB. Might not be as good as SS, but I think very close. Have seen a number of measurements in German speaker magazines, and they meassure really well. The new Satori (or an OEM version) is used in the new Wilson models, as far as I know ....
Baldin
Baldin
Hi,
Your talking nonsense. They are objective as opposed to subjective.
Your musings as to the alleged methods flaws is subjective nonsense.
If you can't see the objective data in his tests, your willfully being blind.
rgds, sreten.
Zaphs opinion of each driver is of course a little subjective, but
not much, compared to those who's opinions are only subjective.
Last edited:
Maybe off topic ... sorry ... but I would really consider SB Acoustics. As far as I know the guys have been working for SS before starting SB. Might not be as good as SS, but I think very close. Have seen a number of measurements in German speaker magazines, and they meassure really well. The new Satori (or an OEM version) is used in the new Wilson models, as far as I know ....
Baldin
Indeed SB should be mentioned as their drivers are of excellent quality too. The Satori probably represents pretty much the best 6-7" driver that money can buy, that is if it's the kind of driver you are after. Extremely low distortion, excellent cone, but quite pricey. The only flaw with the cheaper SB offerings is that the breakup of the paper models is harder to deal with than if it was less pronounced.
Here is a kit design using the Dayton RS drivers
Pennywise Series
total parts cost approximately $ 1250 from Parts Express
Best of Luck
Peter
Pennywise Series
total parts cost approximately $ 1250 from Parts Express
Best of Luck
Peter
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.